Two House members from opposite sides of the aisle have put forward a plan to make housing more affordable for middle- and lower-income Americans by updating a decades-old federal program. Their approach shifts how federal funds are used and who can access them, aiming to lower the hidden costs that make homes unaffordable for many first-time buyers.
The bill targets the HOME Investments Partnership Program and tries to modernize rules that have not seen major updates since the early 1990s. Republicans and Democrats working together is a practical move to tackle rising costs and stagnant homeownership rates across the country.
The pitch is simple: use federal dollars smarter so communities can absorb big upfront infrastructure expenses instead of passing them to developers and buyers. “Traditionally, the program that we’re remodeling… has favored multifamily. But an apartment is not the American Dream. The American Dream is a single-family home,” he said.
That language is intentional and shows the bill’s prioritization of ownership over rental units for families chasing stability and wealth-building. “And with these changes to the program, it’s my hope that these dollars will leverage the building of new homes, it will leverage the rehab of dilapidated structures, including homes, and it will make some multifamily opportunities even more attractive.”
Flood lays out a clear, real-world example of how shifting costs can move the needle for buyers in places like his Nebraska district. “The cost of a lot, before you even buy the ground, there’s already $25,000 in there. If the city of Columbus, Nebraska, gets $2.5 million from the Home Partnership program, the city can go in and expand stormwater and sewer and maybe even pavement and streets,” he explained.
When municipalities take on infrastructure work, developers can offer cheaper lots and builders can price starter homes lower, which is the point. “And suddenly, instead of being a $50,000 lot, it’s a $20,000 lot. Instead of being a $300,000 home, you know, it’s a $270,000 home because the cost of that was ultimately given to the city, and the city used it to build city infrastructure, not making the developer do that.”
The proposal also widens who can qualify for assistance, lifting restrictive income cutoffs that shut out communities that otherwise could support affordable housing near jobs and amenities. “The other thing we’re really focused on is making sure that communities that have a median income, that average, aren’t kicked out of the process simply because they want to put in affordable housing,” he said. “So we’re taking the average median income standard from 80% of the county average to 100%, to make communities that have all the nice amenities able to participate in the program.”
Rep. Emanuel Cleaver echoed the value of revamping HOME as a tool for expanding supply and restoring access to homeownership for working families. “By revamping and revitalizing the HOME Program—one of our greatest tools to expand the supply of affordable housing for working-class families—we can ensure that affordable housing and the American Dream of homeownership are once again attainable from the heartland to the coasts.”
The context is stark: first-time buyers are a smaller share of the market than they used to be and the age of new buyers has been climbing, which makes policy fixes urgent for those who want to buy sooner rather than later. Flood points to high development costs driven by modern permitting and infrastructure requirements as a big, solvable part of the problem.
The effort leans into conservative priorities of local control and efficient use of federal funds, and it gives credit to national leadership that put housing on the agenda. “President Trump accelerated our success and our progress on this issue when he came out very forcefully earlier in the summer and said that housing affordability was one of the top goals of his administration,” he said.
